Woulda loved to. Execs i traveled with had other plans tho.![]()
That I totally get
Seriously though - I had people sitting on the FLOOR. That. was awesome.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Woulda loved to. Execs i traveled with had other plans tho.![]()
Sorry I missed yours today....got pulled in to an executive lunch thing for partners. Going to try and make it tomorrow. Thought mine went real well today. The lab didn't break, so that's always good.
The Cloud Suites only come with Enterprise + as a lot of the features that come with Enterprise + will be leveraged within vCloud Director.Also with the announcement of vCloud Suite, what happens to vSphere Standard, Enterprise, Enterprise Plus? Is it sticking around?
Guess I will just need to run the numbers when I get back in the office. We were planning to upgrade to Enterprise Plus and also planned on buying vCenter Ops.
Some of the features in vCloud we are interested in so it may make sense to just upgrade to vCloud Suite Advanced.
There are use cases for vCloud Director for all sizes IMO.
Am I the only one a little disappointed by the way they announced the new vCloud Suite in the GS.
Free Upgrade for Enterprise + customers, but they left out the little detail about that the free upgrade is to vCloud Suite Standard, and that vCloud Suite Standard doesn't include most of the things showcased in the GS.
Also with the announcement of vCloud Suite, what happens to vSphere Standard, Enterprise, Enterprise Plus? Is it sticking around? For us the cloud suite isn't really needed but we were looking at purchasing vCOPS.
Quick question..hopefully lopoetve can chime in here. For the HoL..I have the architecture document that VMware published..but i'm confused about one thing. I know they have a Control Center VM as the entry point to their vApp but they are using View so is the Control Center desktop within the vApp a View Desktop that's provided to the end-user or is the View desktop a completely different environment?
We are mapping out our Future Lab Infrastructure and while it certainly is not going to be as robust as this it will be based on vCloud Director and we would like to use some of the same methodology behind the HoL. We are going to use a customized version of Autolabs from labguides.com to provision a mobile lab environment to show our customers vSphere/View/VCD.
Sorry, no clue - I wasn't involved in the insane (read: complex) HOL architecture
I know who to ask though. Let me find out.
If you can find out that would be awesome! Thanks.
Netjunkie,
Watched your session on the VMworld website, i'm sooooo glad they added the video content of some of the sessions already.
Do they sell access to the vworld site remote only? I could not make it out to vmworld this year but really wish I could catch some of these sessions online..
I just watched the Sakac and Stewart video. I'm curious why they suggest large VMFS datastores vs Duncan Epping that talks about using smaller one due to SCSI locking. When does KISS start affecting performance? At face value it seems like having a 64TB datastore is perfectly OK. What if that datastore has 200 VMs inside it? That seems counter-intuitive to everything else I read.
http://www.yellow-bricks.com/2011/07/29/vmfs-5-lun-sizing/
I can understand that. Mitigating risk is a big one. Also replication I can see that as well. However wouldn't the replication concern only be an initial one? I guess it really depends how much change you have on your VMs, but shouldn't your replication technology only be migrating changes after the initial seed? I guess my point is if you have 10GB of change a day, wouldn't it still be 10GB of change regardless of LUN configuration if you replicate everything anyway?
I guess that breaking out into smaller LUNs allows you more granularity when it comes to 'what' you replicate and that's the bigger factor. With one large LUN, you're stuck migrating everything rather than just what really needs to be replicated.
As for restores, are you talking about recovery from backup or from a LUN-based snapshot because the snapshot should be fairly quick regardless of the size of the LUN. From a backup I can see that being an issue sure. I would think that anyone with the capability would be leveraging array based snapshots for faster recovery rather than needing to go back to a full backup right? Forgive me if my logic seems simple, I'm still getting my feet wet in the Storage arena.
I just watched the Sakac and Stewart video. I'm curious why they suggest large VMFS datastores vs Duncan Epping that talks about using smaller one due to SCSI locking. When does KISS start affecting performance? At face value it seems like having a 64TB datastore is perfectly OK. What if that datastore has 200 VMs inside it? That seems counter-intuitive to everything else I read.
http://www.yellow-bricks.com/2011/07/29/vmfs-5-lun-sizing/
I can understand that. Mitigating risk is a big one. Also replication I can see that as well. However wouldn't the replication concern only be an initial one? I guess it really depends how much change you have on your VMs, but shouldn't your replication technology only be migrating changes after the initial seed? I guess my point is if you have 10GB of change a day, wouldn't it still be 10GB of change regardless of LUN configuration if you replicate everything anyway?
I guess that breaking out into smaller LUNs allows you more granularity when it comes to 'what' you replicate and that's the bigger factor. With one large LUN, you're stuck migrating everything rather than just what really needs to be replicated.
As for restores, are you talking about recovery from backup or from a LUN-based snapshot because the snapshot should be fairly quick regardless of the size of the LUN. From a backup I can see that being an issue sure. I would think that anyone with the capability would be leveraging array based snapshots for faster recovery rather than needing to go back to a full backup right? Forgive me if my logic seems simple, I'm still getting my feet wet in the Storage arena.
Thanks guys for the input. These are really the same concepts that I was already working with prior to seeing that video. It complicates things for people with lesser experience when you hear things like that from veterans. It makes complete sense from a mitigation perspective to not do giant LUNs if you can avoid it while at the same time keeping the storage as easy to administer as possible. At the end of the day I control both the VMware side and the storage side of things, so making it harder only makes my job harder.
You got it, it's easier and quicker to revert the volume to a point in time snapshot than to mount and recover and considering it's one vm on the datastore you just roll back the volume. Very easy, very quick. It also accomplishes two things, one, you're not impacting any other VM that's on the datastore since it's dedicated to that VM in case of corruption or issues on the SAN side and of course as mentioned above, very easy, very fast to recover in the event of a OS FS corruption etc. The two customers that had issues the past month I was referring earlier was OS/Application related corruption, issues.Is there a reason for doing them one datastore per VM? You should be able to mount an Equallogic snapshot and recover a single file from it correct? Probably less clicks to recover, but still curious.
Watch my presentation - I cover a lot of the basics that get forgotten.
Do you know when yours will be posted? I can't seem to find it.
That would sound like an amazing experience, especially if you can tie in a family vaca on the side.
What does the job think? Do they support you doing that?